set_deck_card_quantity

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, description must disclose behavior. It states the tool performs a non-delta mutation, can remove a row (quantity 0), and requires an API key. However, it does not discuss error conditions, idempotency, or side effects, leaving gaps in behavioral transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences efficiently convey purpose, key behavior, distinction from sibling, and authentication requirement. Front-loaded with the most critical information. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Description covers core operation and a sibling alternative but lacks return value description and error handling guidance. Given the tool's simplicity and absence of output schema, it is adequate but not complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds limited value. It reinforces the 'absolute' and 'not delta' nature already implied by the schema. No additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for individual parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states it sets an absolute quantity for a card and board in a deck, distinguishing it from a delta operation. It specifies the effect of quantity 0 and references the specific resource (card + board). This differentiates it from sibling tools like add_deck_card.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly tells when to use an alternative: 'Use add_deck_card to increment instead.' This provides clear guidance for selecting the correct tool. The requirement for IWMM_API_KEY is also mentioned, which helps agents understand prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.